It has taken less than 10 years to pry open the can of worms enshrouding the pathetic 9/11 scam. The central role of the major newsmedia corporations to pull off this sordid "terror" simulation has now been comprehensively exposed. Before joining this forum, please get familiar with the research at: http://www.septemberclues.info

Thank you, that explains a lot. Still, in 2001 there must have been many people who had not yet gone electronic / digital. I still use my 1979 Minolta, a mechanical / manual camera. I wonder if any people had their camera films 'lost' by the developers. Or could unexposed camera film be disrupted in a similar manner as the videotapes? (Sorry, I'm a techno-dummy. )

burlington wrote:I don't know where to put this comment -- none of the topics refer to it. I'd like to know where all the amateur photography is. Almost everyone had a camera by 2001; digital point-and-shoots, old film cameras, camera phones, camcorders... There should be literally thousands of REAL videos and photographs of the towers from that day.

I am particularly curious about the ferry boat which can be seen passing the towers as the JPEG plane glides into the second tower. It is a good bet that most of the passengers were tourists, and tourists would likely have been looking at the twin towers and most likely many of them would have had cameras pointed at them. They would be ideal witnesses to confirm (for those who need to hear it from witnesses) that there was no plane. Where are they, and where are their photos and videos...

Not quite correct! Cell phones were slow on the uptake in the USA apparently, pagers were still all the rage in 2001. Nobody had camera phones, they hadn't been invented yet!

You have to remember too the topography of New York, a city of canyons! Walk round the block you see nothing except the street you are on! How can you photograph something you can't see! That includes the smokescreen that went up prior to the first demolition charges going off, if indeed they did use demolition charges!

i recently saw September Clues on YT, by mere accident, and it rang a long time silenced bell from when i saw the 9/11 events live on tv, back in 2001, in Romania. I', a romanian, now working in constructions in Germany, so please excuse my not so good english. I always beleived the whole thing is veeeeery fishy but i haven't really thought about it much since it happened.But now you created a brand new hobby for me: photo-detective! :-)) So, attashed here is my first try, with a photo i saw here in this thread and wich immediately struck my eyes with its failures :-). Note: i'm don't have anything to do with this kind of work-media, photography, editing etc etc- so i hope you'll excuse my poor skills on this one, i've done it all in Paint, because Paint is understandable and usuable for me ))

For a better view, i think, you have to zoom in into the picture to see what i wrote there.

Hm, how do I upload/attach a photo here? i drew/wrote on the photo in Paint so it's not the same anymore as it appears on it's website...please help and sorry again, i don't know this kind of stuff.

i recently saw September Clues on YT, by mere accident, and it rang a long time silenced bell from when i saw the 9/11 events live on tv, back in 2001, in Romania. I', a romanian, now working in constructions in Germany, so please excuse my not so good english. I always beleived the whole thing is veeeeery fishy but i haven't really thought about it much since it happened.But now you created a brand new hobby for me: photo-detective! :-)) So, attashed here is my first try, with a photo i saw here in this thread and wich immediately struck my eyes with its failures :-). Note: i'm don't have anything to do with this kind of work-media, photography, editing etc etc- so i hope you'll excuse my poor skills on this one, i've done it all in Paint, because Paint is understandable and usuable for me ))

For a better view, i think, you have to zoom in into the picture to see what i wrote there.

Hm, how do I upload/attach a photo here? i drew/wrote on the photo in Paint so it's not the same anymore as it appears on it's website...please help and sorry again, i don't know this kind of stuff.

See the rest of the new video's posted in September 11th 2001 WNYW Dub2 sequence aswell.

@ 1:09 when "interview" switches to bald man in blue who says "I saw it all"

Notice behind him there is a fireman standing in the street, and another fireman passing by the stationary fireman and coming towards (and in back of, from camera point of view) the bald man being interviewed.

In the next few seconds 4 fireman are seen passing behind the right shoulder of this guy.

At 0:37 the shadows of the 2 guys cast in the exact opposite direction. one would assume that shadow 2 could be a reflection shadow, but it oddly is as "thick" as shadow 1. the CGI software possibly didn't differentiate between 'direct' shadows and reflected ones.

full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3em5QJukqrgVideo Link - http://youtu.be/3em5QJukqrgis another strange creation popping up on Youtube suggesting that fireworks went off up top somewhere (video doesn't pan up) or in the intact wall creating a rain of bright, glittering stuff. I have a feeling this footage is 100% fake and published to confuse people.

tak47 wrote:At 0:37 the shadows of the 2 guys cast in the exact opposite direction. one would assume that shadow 2 could be a reflection shadow, but it oddly is as "thick" as shadow 1. the CGI software possibly didn't differentiate between 'direct' shadows and reflected ones.

what do you think?

I think it's an excellent find, tak47. It goes to corroborate similar findings I have made in other purported "9/11 videos" set in the same general area, EAST of the towers. I have added a link to your above post in my UNDEBUNKABLE SEPCLUES thread: viewtopic.php?p=2354010#p2354010

To be sure, I have never observed any such "reflected light" shadows in my entire lifetime. If some Joe would argue that the "SHADOW 2" that you pointed out is due to some sort of "reflected light from buildings across the street", the onus is on this Joe to prove - empirically - that light can bounce from buildings and produce such 'reverse-to sunlight' shadows (as sharp and long as that "SHADOW 2") behind a man standing in a shaded area across the street.

In fact, even the very (in)famous NAUDET BROTHERS' video of "flight 11" striking WTC1 has similar shadow problems. Here's an old post of mine regarding this topic:

How can this fireman have a shadow in a shaded area...unless there were 2 suns shining in New York that day ?

Now, some have argued that this shadow is possible: as the argument goes, the pink Post Office buiding across the street reflects / bounces off enough light to produce that shadow. Now, just to get a better view of the Lispenard st/Church st intersection, here are two Google Earth images - evidently captured on a sunny Manhattan morning (reasonably similar to the morning of September 11, 2001) :

Now, does this girl project a shadow - in her shaded area? ( "X" is the location of the fireman in the Naudet video)

The street light in the Naudet video only has 2 lights. The google street view map clearly displays 3 on the traffic light. I am not saying they didn't change the light after 2001. I am merely noting that they are different.

I would have thought all road traffic lights would require a red, orange and green light. Just having two doesn't work unless it's for staggering traffic on a motorway onramp in countries where people seem to have lost the ability to merge like a zip...

At 0:37 the shadows of the 2 guys cast in the exact opposite direction. one would assume that shadow 2 could be a reflection shadow, but it oddly is as "thick" as shadow 1. the CGI software possibly didn't differentiate between 'direct' shadows and reflected ones.

screenshot:

what do you think?

The shadows don't make sense at all...even "preacher man's" shadow - when he's giving his quick interview - the sun is behind him, in the camera view - then when he walks across the street his shadow is towards the direction of the sun.

There's something else I'd like someone to comment on - it looks like a screen color or rendering glitch, it's between

0:34-0:35 - part of the street goes from grey to white and if you pause it at this point it looks like it was an overlay that was somewhat poorly filled in. (Comes into view from right of picture as camera pans right)